Darwin's Naturalization Hypothesis Revisited

Abstract

In The Origin of Species, Darwin (1859) drew attention to observations by Alphonse de Candolle (1855) that floras gain by naturalization far more species belonging to new genera than species belonging to native genera. Darwin (1859, p. 86) goes on to give a specific example: “In the last edition of Dr. Asa Gray’s ‘Manual of the Flora of the United States’ ... out of the 162 naturalised genera, no less than 100 genera are not there indigenous.” Darwin used these data to support his theory of intense competition between congeners, described only a few pages earlier: “As the species of the same genus usually have, though by no means invariably, much similarity in habits and constitution, and always in structure, the struggle will generally be more severe between them” (1859, p. 60). Darwin’s intriguing observations have recently attracted renewed interest, as comprehensive lists of naturalized plants have become available for various regions of the world. Two studies (Mack 1996; Rejmanek 1996, 1998) have concluded that naturalized floras provide some support for Darwin’s hypothesis, but only one of these studies used statistical tests. Analyses of additional floras are needed to test the generality of Darwin’s naturalization hypothesis. Mack (1996) tabulated data from six regional floras within the United States and noted that naturalized species more often belong to alien genera than native genera, with the curious exception of one region (New York). In addition to the possibility of strong competition between native and introduced congeners, Mack (1996) proposed that specialist native herbivores, or pathogens, may be